Its still better than OTL chance you would have on a AMC when faced with them and even if they win its far more likely to save the convoy by mission killing or even slowing them down sufficiently for them to be caught by more modern RN battleships. Even a 13.5" isn't small its 8x 639.6 kg shell out to 23,000 yards, this put it at a significant disadvantage but if it can have an escort lay smoke to hide behind it would be very nasty to S&G to force action.
McPherson
Banned
Read it again, please. It deals with missile coverage from surface and air platforms. Its called a "passing shot."
And guess what, nothing whatsoever implies these crazy zero-zero pursuits in pistol range or dozens of interceptors per missile that made the core of your claims. If you want to use something as a source, it should back your argument rather than being vaguely related to it and not cover your actual point.
IIRC there was some planning on this but it was felt that they couldn't carry enough aircraft to justify the massive conversion costs...
McPherson
Banned
Not buying your interpretation. Sorry, but when the algorithm treatment deals directly with positioning assets to cover threat axis, it is also directly addressing engagement merge times of launch platforms and effectors (F-pole). You can deny it all you want, but it is plain to read that is the intent and treatment.
Last edited:
The other problem is if the Kongos are converted, every other capital ship is too slow to escort them. Unless the Yamatos are instead built as fast battleships or the B-65 cruisers get built that is ...
*rolls eyes harder* It's not my fault you cannot understand your own source and that you believe a Mach 1.8 plane will do a zero-distance interception on its Mach 3 target in the era of missiles. Air combat in the real-world isn't Star Wars or Ace Combat.
It is a very strange hill for you to die on, TBH.
McPherson
Banned
Do you understand that you just claimed a launch platform (RAFALE) cannot maneuver to position to make a head on or passing shot or a chase shot with a MACH 4 missile (MICA) to merge with a MACH 2.8 missile? Or that a paper that discusses the positioning algorithm directly addresses this point? Ship or plane? I mean do you understand what you just wrote?
And don't claim I said it was the plane that was the effector. I plainly stated it was the missile the plane carried. The plane just had to get to MICA NEZ.
I am happy on my hill. How are you doing in that valley?
Let me quote you:
Your claim was that the SAM would be a danger to the defending planes due to the proximity fuses... AKA that the planes would be in spitting range of the anti-ship missiles. Which is silly, considering that MICA have a NEZ around a dozen km and Meteor have a NEZ of around 60 km. Wanna retract your claim now that you conceded that it was about getting the defender planes in the NEZ, AKA far enough that ship-launched SAM targeting the AShM wouldn't be a threat to the planes?
And then there's the just as silly perception that you'd need a couple dozen SAM to shoot down a single AShM.
EDIT: but then, there's you refuting the data on missile range, ignoring the pictures showing clearly how outside the hull the VLS clusters are, and so on...
McPherson
Banned
Yeah. But even if the IJN was crazy enough to do a conversion (Ise and Hyuga in WW II come to mind and I think I posted something about them in this thread...) they still do not solve their 70% problem. New construction is about as expensive and it gives them more hulls. We can argue that they should have followed a more balanced build and modernize policy and foregone the Yamatos with more logic?
On September 3rd 1939 the world finds out why Britain signed up to the Washington Naval Treaty. The Royal Navy had made a breakthrough that took them in a completely unexpected direction. (While excavating tunnels near Box Hill Wiltshire in 1916 a sealed cavern was found containing the archives of the people of Atlantia rescued from their sunken homeland on Dogger Island.)
Last edited:
I want to see German Toasters now!On September 3rd 1939 the world finds out why Britain signed up to the Washington Naval Treaty. The Royal Navy had made a breakthrough that took them in a completely unexpected direction.
Behold His Majesties Ship the Battlestar Britannia!On September 3rd 1939 the world finds out why Britain signed up to the Washington Naval Treaty. The Royal Navy had made a breakthrough that took them in a completely unexpected direction.
McPherson
Banned
1. The Rafales in the outer zone are 15-30 minutes out. The Hawkeye gives 100 seconds warning and a vector with merge instructions. What is CdG doing? Reinforcing CAP with 5 minute alert aircraft. What are the bodyguards doing knowing that they have just 30 seconds cushion to get Aster 30s up and over? They are throwing missiles into the air until their radars see that the skies are clear of inbounds. That means they keep shooting until they get radar confirmed kills or run out of interceptors.
2. The Meteor was not introduced into this scenario because it doesn't quite work yet.
3. Don't move the goalposts or misinterpret what I wrote. (^^^)
4. Inner zone. How many cats has she, and alert 5s can CDG throw into the air. Two. During this she fires Asters straight up? How many Rafales DIE? One. You could not figure any of this out?
Last edited:
I love the concept of having a five minute alert aircraft intercepting a target 100 seconds away. Interesting application of mathematics.
So your source is now a blog article from 2016 that you claim says the missile does not work despite being in service and praising the "CUDA", AKA a model missile that never got beyond the mock-up stage? Meteor, unlike what you'd like us to believe, works pretty damn well and has been tested as well as introduced in service.
Yes, I forgot that somehow, five-minute alert fighters get up and in pistol range of a missile you claim was detected 100 seconds before hit.
Given that Alert Five means "Five minutes" and that in the real world, you don't need two dozen missiles to shoot down a single AShM, my failure was to not figure out you were talking about your imaginary world.
Please, please stop making stuff up. It's seriously annoying.
McPherson
Banned
You need to remember everything I write. (^^^) As you can see you missed the part about flight operations during a missile attack. Alert 5 means 300 seconds warning (about 400,000 meters out). With Sunburn (80,000 meters) it is more like 100 seconds.
CDG can shoot 2 aircraft off in 40-60 seconds flat presuming they are collared to the cats and ready to go. that is 60 seconds to climb and turn to meet. Plenty of time.
CDG can shoot 2 aircraft off in 40-60 seconds flat presuming they are collared to the cats and ready to go. that is 60 seconds to climb and turn to meet. Plenty of time.
Yes, I remember that you make up false claims by using obsolete articles that do not say what you pretend they say. I remember that you imagine that five minutes = 100 seconds. I remember that you pretend that missiles massively outside the hull are more of a danger to the ship than Zumwalt's missiles. I remember that you claim the Sunburn has an IR sensor.
I remember that you are pretty much lying over and over again.
McPherson
Banned
(^^^) Regards that 3 year old article. Think about what problems the update link the Meteor still has, what the cruise out problem is and why the Americans still went to a pair of rocket solutions and their own telemetry way, all discussed in that article. I mean do you understand why that happened?
Because they simply haven't made any AAM program early enough to have a ramjet missile now. Instead of making up stuff, you simply should realize that your own sources explicitely says the missile is operational. While you claimed that blog post said the missile doesn't work.
That's called lying.
Logic and Japanese strategic planning 1932-1945 don't really mix...
I personally think the Yamatos, as cool as they were, were wasted tonnage- too slow, too thirsty, too expensive. What, IMO, would have been better, would have been a modernized No. 13 type design (900' x 101' x 32', 47 500t standard, 4 x 2 18"/L50, 30kn). Throw some bulges on it, lengthen it to get the fineness back, pop some Ro-Go turbines in there to make them even faster, and turreted DP secondaries replacing 5.5" LA in casemates and 4.7" AA in single mounts. It's still too big and too thirsty and too expensive, but at least it can keep up with carriers. Either that, or a similarly fast 16" armed ship, like a neo-Kii or "Fast Nagato". You could probably build 1 more with the tonnage savings, and stretch every iron doorknob in Tokyo that much farther.
ETA: I also believe that the Ise and Fuso classes, both 14" pre-Jutland designs, were really too old to justify the amount of ¥ spent on them, but the IJN was in a bind- with so few capital ships, 12 x 14" x 4 made up a lot of their total firepower, so it's a case of damned if you do (money spent modernizing an obsolete ship is wasted cash), damned if you don't (if you don't spend it, you have a ship that's more obsolete or no ship at all).
However, there really is no good option for Imperial Japan to fight the kind of war they wanted to fight. Naval strength is built strength, and torpedoing the economy in the name of military buildup inadvertently sabotages that.
Even with Washington ratios, if Japan manages to have Britain, the USA and France allied against them, that's 5 + 5 + 1.75; 11.75 : 3, so off the bat they're outnumbered essentially 4 : 1. Without the Treaty it would be even worse, as Britain, let alone the USA, can out-build Japan easily. With odds like that, the only way to win is not to play, or join a winning team; neither of which 1932-1945 Japan was willing to do.
Last edited: